The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

except that this judgment.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of six months, the suspension of execution of two years, the observation of protection) is too unreasonable.

2. Examination ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

According to the search results of each Supreme Court case and each judgment, the defendant was sentenced on May 25, 2017 to a maximum of six months of imprisonment with prison labor for habitual larceny, etc. at the Gwangju District Court on June 2, 2017, which became final and conclusive on June 2, 2017. On February 17, 2017, the Gwangju District Court sentenced the defendant to a short term of one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for special larceny, etc. on July 17, 2017, which became final and conclusive on July 17, 2017. Since the criminal facts against the defendant are concurrent crimes with each of the above crimes for which punishment becomes final and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more in this respect.

4. The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts constituting the offense and the evidence admitted by this court is as follows: “The Defendant was sentenced to a short term of four months at the Gwangju District Court on May 25, 2017 to a short term of six months for habitual larceny, etc. and the above judgment became final and conclusive on June 2, 2017. On February 17, 2017, the Gwangju District Court was sentenced to a short term of one year and six months for special larceny, etc. and became final and conclusive on July 17, 2017,” and “1. The above judgment was the same as the corresponding column of the judgment of the lower court except for adding “the search and judgment of each Supreme Court on July 2, 201: the search and judgment of each Supreme Court” to the summary of the evidence. Accordingly, it is cited as it is in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Article 150 of the Road Traffic Act concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 150 of the same Act as the selective punishment;